Wow, Ford again! Pretty amazing considering plant shutdown, reduced fleet sales, and the oldest platform of the lot. Good job Ford!

Ford is offering up to $13000 off F150s in my area so probably why they sell so well. The Colorado will probably be outselling the frontier by next month. The Silverado and Sierra together outsold the F150 for the month and not far behind for the year. Plus GMs profit per truck is higher than Ford so good good GM!

Job*

All GM/Chevy trucks combined sold less than the f series. It isn't even close for gubmint motors, even worse for Fiat/Ram. Maybe next year...NOT!!

So the baseline sales for the new Chevy/GM midsize are 60,000 a year and growing....

We'll see how many sell in the first half of 2015.

They really need to get the 8 speed into that truck to truely be class leading on FE.

@Chris

GM trucks destroyed F series sales in December, by more than 8,000 units not including midsize. GM trucks outsold Ford trucks by over 12,000 units in Decmeber.

Ford is offering up to $13k off 2014's. Anyone can give a truck away. GM has highest ATP (average transaction price) and lowest incentive spending of the 3.

Do some research before you starting flapping your mouth about things you have no idea about.

Ford was running at half-capacity with the oldest platform in the industry and it still outsold Sierra/Silverado/Colorado/Canyon combined. So GM, even with it's toy trucks thrown in fell short of Ford - heh heh.

No vehicle with square wheel-wells will ever succeed.

@ Chris

By a whopping 1,000 units and the mid sizers just came out lol.

I bet this time next year all the Ford fan boys say o look Ford increased by 20% compared to last Decemeber. They forgot they were horrible in Decemeber 2014 where everyone else gained 30% or more...

You Ram Boys STOP saying that the 2015 F-150 has a problem with the glass falling out!
STOP IT !
There's no truth that the aluminum body is so flimsy that it can't support the glass!
STOP SAYING THAT !

My dealer still doesn't have great deals on 2014 f-150s, but they are still selling them good. They don't have any left configured even close to the way I want, so no chance I'm going to buy a 2014 now. Was waiting for 12 to 13,000 off but the best I have been able to get in the last four months is 9,000 off. I can get a ram for 12,000 off msrp right now. Guess I'll wait til they start discounting the 2015's later this year. Was looking at used pickups and prices for them are RIDICULOUS. I can almost buy a new truck for the price of a used one with 60,000 miles! I bought my ram 1500 4x4 hemi brand new for a little over $25,000. I can't find even a used 2011 or later f150 with less than 60,000 miles for that price.

Saw a cool video on "Fast N Loud Demolition Theater" last week. Chevy vs Ford monster truck pull. Ford literally pulled the wheels and axels off the Chevy. Kinda the way sales went this year.

I see the F-Series beat GM Twinkies by 12,263 units.

I see Ford ahead by 12,263 units over GM Twinkies.

Ford still falling and GM outselling Ford again for the month. And they did that while selling over 11,000 mid size trucks. And also with GM's hot selling full size suvs. Looks like GM is out growing the competition by offering models that the competition can not match. GREAT job GM!!!

So what about GM selling more than 50,000 more vehicles than Ford in December in the US??

GM Full size SUV's sell 10:1 compared to Furd.

GM and Chrysler both reported a 20% increase in sales for December while Ford was flat. Ford has reported flat sales for the past 5 months. No wonder Mually bailed!

"So what about GM selling more than 50,000 more vehicles than Ford in December in the US??

GM Full size SUV's sell 10:1 compared to Furd."

This is a truck site.

Could have fooled me, I thought this was turning into a car site.

All this talk about the ecoboost engines lol. (Car Engines).

Those car engines can beat a GM V8, all day.

@ Frank

Oh is that so?

In what, fuel mileage?? WRONG

What bout performance?? WRONG

What about reliability?? WRONG

Warranty?? WRONG

Resale?? WAY WRONG

6.2L Mops the floor with any EcoBust in all 3 categories, and will last more than twice as long with no issues.

Go drink some more kool aide, and drive your ECOBUST around and make sure you drive it hard so you don't get carbon build up LOL!!

All GM engines http://www.tfltruck.com/2014/09/2015-ford-f-150-v-competition-drag-time-showdown-video/

All other GM Truck Engines http://www.tfltruck.com/2014/09/2015-ford-f-150-v-competition-drag-time-showdown-video/

3.5L Ecoboost > All other GM engines
3.5L = 6.2L

"GM Full size SUV's sell 10:1 compared to Furd."

2013 stats indicate that a huge portion of GM's SUV sales are to rental fleets:
75% - Yukon XL
> 40% - Yukon
> 40% - Tahoe

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/10/chart-day-americas-top-rental-cars/

If you factor police vehicles a large portion of those large SUV sales are to fleets.

Yes, you can thank Ford..................... for killing the Crown Victoria.

@ Frank

LOL do you really think a short little drag race is an actual test??

Atleast do a 1/4 mile not some 300 ft kiddie race. Again, this test was put on by Ford. Of course it will favor them and their "pre" production trucks.

If you took fleet from Ford they wouldn't sell any trucks, so bad example with GM SUVs.

Go drink more ecobust kool aide and run around telling everyone it gets better mileage than anything etc etc. When in reality it gets worse.

PS has Ford fixed all the Ecobust issues yet?? (Carbon build up, bad intercooler design, tranny problems)

@Anything but an EcoBust

"PS has Ford fixed all the Ecobust issues yet?"

Carbon build up is not exclusive to Ford. It has been noted as an area of concern with ALL DI engines with similar crankcase ventilation systems.
The 800 lb gorilla in the room is the fact that DI engines produce similar fine particulates as diesel engines. Once environmental agencies and greens catch wind of that fact we may see particulate filters and DEF added to those engines. That would kill any advantage to a DI engine.

"Bad intercooler design" - it was designed to function under heavy load conditions...... and yes, as far as I can tell it hasn't been an issue for a while now.

Transmissions?

Post your proof.

As far as Ford fleet sales goes, they aren't 40-50% like GM SUV's so what is your point?

@ Lou

Actually the Ecoboost has the worst carbon build up issues of any truck engine. You also can't use any carbon deposit additive etc because it will hurt the turbos. N/A DI engines don't have close to the carbon build up issues as the ecobusts.

When will you Ford fan boys ever admit that the Ecobusts are a complete waste and all they are is an advertising gimmick??

All they do is take more fuel, create more issues, and sound like a sick mosquito.

Ford couldn't make a V-8 engine that performs and is efficient so they did their best to trick their customers into thinking the Ecobust's are the end all be all.

Real world fuel economy with the Ecobust is embarrassing not to mention down right awful towing.

Y'all can be eco boosting, I rather Dynamic Skip Fire or Dynamic Skip Fords LOL!

http://www.autonews.com/article/20150105/OEM06/150109992/gm-expects-15-mpg-gain-from-new-cylinder-deactivation-system

I agree with Beebe for the most part that for a little more you can buy a new truck rather than a late model used truck with 60k plus miles. This seems to be regardless of brand since trucks hold their overall value better. Another thing if you plan to keep you truck longer than most it might be better to buy new. Hopefully the increase in new vehicle sales will continue for a while, the economy sure needs the boost.

Where are the Ram fan boys that were saying Ram would out sell Chevy??

Chevy out sold Ram by 90,000 units in 2014, thats over 2 months of extra sales that Ram would have to sell.

YOU HAVE A WAYS TO GO RAMMIES!!

@Anything but an EcoBust -

The Pentastar V6 is getting DI and turbo's.

GM has a TT DI Cadillac engine that has been long rumoured to find its way into their pickups.

TTDI is not without its problems BUT how can fanboys of rival products like yourself slag a product when the competition is going down the same path.

I was talking to a guy that works for a Forest Resource company. They had 1 Ecoboost bought in 2011 that had the intercooler replaced under warranty. The rest have been completely reliable. These trucks live in dusty conditions in the summer and run in the winter in -45C weather.

Real world fuel economy depends on how they are driven. The worst case scenario is mpg ON PAR with larger V8's.
Best case scenario is superior mpg. I've run across multiple examples of both.

Hmmmm.......... do I trust an anonymous internet source or multiple individuals I know (including fleet operators) that say the opposite to you?

@ LOU

Superior mpg?? LOL compared to what the ol 5.4L Triton V-8??

The 5.3 and 6.2 both beat the ecoboost in real world mileage, especially towing.

If you're comparing mileage to the 5.4L then yes the ecoboost gets better than what that did. GM V-8s get better mileage than even the 5.0L in the new Aluminum body. So you can't compare to Ford v-8s.

Times have changed, the good ol push rod v-8s from GM get better mileage than the ecoboost which has twice as many moving parts and 2 turbos.

Keep buying those Ecobusts, Ford is depending on people like you to buy them and when the warranty is up they rely on you to keep them running, so they can profit on oem parts.

Who cares how many are sold? Just because something sells a lot, or doesn't, has little bearing on it's quality, or lack thereof.

The comments of the "tools" on all sides are amusing though!

So you're citing tests done with Pre-Production Fords?? LOL, trucks that are more than likely programmed much different than production models.

Also, you're very wrong with saying the 6.2L requires premium. It is actually exactly the same as the ecobusts, they are both recommended to run premium fuel.

Good job exaggerating that. It is actually more important to run premium in the ecoboost than the v-8.

I think its funny you go right around the other fuel mileage tests done where the 2.7L got worse mileage than the v-8s.

You have zero clue about the 2.7L reliabilty. You're taking Fords word for it lol!! Go drive around in a noise machine that creates fake noises!!

And it is very true the 3.5L has carbon issues. Get your head out of the sand!!

It seems that I have to point out that Ford probably sold more than 12,000 F-450s that GM has no competition for (GM's bad- not Ford). GM half tons probably outsold Ford half tons by 30,000 units. I do believe Ford probably provided ringers for most of the performance and mileage tests posted above. Acceleration takes horsepower. Look at the diesels- the Duramax walked away from everyone until the 440hp Powerstoke came along. Even with 100lb-ft less torque, the Duramax still owns the Cummins when geared similarly. To think that an engine with 30hp more in a half ton would be slower stretches credulity. Yes, the 2.7 has more torque down low. Once off the line, neither of these trucks dips below 3500 in an acceleration test, tossing that argument out the window. Maybe the Ford was gearing was a better match for the terrain/ elevation at which the tests were conducted. It wouldn't be like a manufacturer to conduct a test where it's product has a specific advantage over the competition (1st Hurt Locker).. ;)

@ Sal Minella ,

Those Monster Trucks probably use a Chrysler HEMI !! Most do !

I wonder what will happen if car sales slump a little over 2015.

Gas is cheaper, but this can't go one indefinitely. With interest rates that allow for much of the car selling business stay low? Probably for a while longer as the lower gas prices will have some form of deflationary effect on the US economy.

The short term for pickup in the US is looking good. Will GM and FCA keep on improving at the expense of Ford?

Will Ford's new aluminium pickup hit the right nerve with future potential pickup buyers and allow F Series to reign supreme?

Somehow I do think Ford will play second fiddle in the overall pickup market for some time yet.

I do think the new Colorado will eventually catch up to the Taco, it's early days yet.

GM's Colorado/Canyon are quite well thought out. A relatively traditional pickup, not to radical, but yet a huge leap in refinement and overall performance.

Congrats GM on out selling ford again 20 years running. Shame on desperate ford throwing the F450 through F950 semi's in there junk pile as pick up trucks. Fords actual pick up trucks sold f150-f350 was under 490,000 for 2014. But keep telling ford girls that inflated sales lie. Ram, keep trying, with 50% of the total sales of GM and 60% of fords sales you are still the pup in the pick up truck race.

The biggest Ford dealer in my area has almost nothing to sell in half ton trucks. Ford better hope they timed this well. Their used inventory is brimming with the same F150 XL work trucks that they couldn't sell last year. Ram and GM both have a much better work truck at the price.

The premium ad spaces in print and TV for the NFL playoffs and Super Bowl have already been bought & paid for.

Spending millions of dollars to drive truck buyers to an empty lot isn't smart.

@papa jim,
I agree with your sentiment.

I've always looked at Ford as the better of the manufacturers at marketing and promotion.

I do think with the 2015 F-150 they've slipped up a little.

They "over sold" the F-150 in giving the impression that it was a world beater and it has yet to be proven so. Even the diesel Ram 1500 and new Colorado got the vote above the F-150.

So at best it's on par with the best pickups on offer, when it should have trounced them considering the Ford talk and the new platform. It should have been the new benchmark for full size pickups. I really don't see this.

One of the problem Ford now has is how many customers that went over and purchased a Ram, Sierra or Silverado will go back to Ford?

For that to occur Ford will need to discount the 2015 heavily for some time to gain it's losses. The truck will be more expensive to build, so it will be relying on higher transaction prices to keep in front.

It will be interesting to see how Ford handles this. Even Ford Australia has lost a lot of ground as of late, a much larger loss percentage wise than in the US.

@BigAl - the more sophisticated Ram suspension did not rate very well in the PUTC test. Look at the braking test. The Ram nose dived badly compared to the Chevy which has the best braking.
The Ram 1500 tends to ride better because for all intents and purposes is set up like a BOF car i.e. Crown Victoria.

Funny or odd how you favoured the Ram because when ever you debated 1/2 ton versus small truck you always mentioned the crappy cargo capacity of full sized trucks.

The PUTC test showed that you can have good cargo capacity and still have a decent ride.

@Big Al from Oz - time will tell when it comes to conquest sales. I find that anecdotal evidence lines up more with what "1elle-elle-aye" said. Virtually everyone that I know that has crossed over to a Chrysler product from another brand has not stayed with them with subsequent purchases.

@PapaJim - inventory may become an issue. My local dealer still has quite a few 2014's left. The 2015's are just starting to trickle in. I'm already starting to notice the occasional one on the road.

@1elle-elle-aye,
Yes, you are correct not all of the reviews showed the new F-150 lacking to be the better of the pickups.

But again, not all of the articles have shown that. Hence, my comment "So at best it's on par with the best pickups on offer".

Every article on the Colorado states it's a clear benchmark for midsizers. This indicates to me that a definite jump in the vehicles performance/refinement in it's segment was made. The aluminium F-150 lacks this all round support by reviewers.

As an aside the Colorado is possibly no better either than the best full size pickups on offer. What has occurred with the Colorado is in the US the midsize market has been neglected for so long it actually caught up with the global midsize pickups. It has made a two generation jump over it's competitors.

You can sit and only identify with the positive F-150 articles at the disregard for the less flattering F-150 articles. This only highlights your obsessiveness with Ford. Try a more rounded and unbiased comprehension of all the material available.

If you have done this you will find the new aluminium F-150 isn't setting overall benchmarks in the full size arena. You must also recognise that I've yet to talk down the 2015 F-150. I've actually made an unbiased assessment of the vehicle.

I've been stating this regarding the new F-150 for some time now, well before any of the reviews were carried out. Even Ford marketing isn't going to use FE as it's number one marketing strategy. This indicates that the primary reason for going to aluminium, ie, for FE purposes wasn't as successful as Ford would have liked.

I'd also bet that the 2.7 might be a bit of a fuel pig under load.

For the 2015 F-150 to become a benchmark a lot more needs to be done. It should have advanced a couple of generations in one move. This would have left the other pickup manufacturers searching for ways to become more competitive.

What Ford has done is very little. As I mentioned the biggest jump is Ford is going to learn how to make aluminium daily drivers. But I do find this a challenge for Ford. It is competing against multiple decades of steel car manufacturing.

As for your SuperDuty comment. How many will move over to the new Cummins Tundra and Titan when they come out?

Remember most SUV SuperDuty pickups are F-250s. The Cummins Titan and Tundra will definitely challenge the lighter HDs. I'd even suspect the V8 Cummins will produce around the same FE as the 2.7 EcoBoost F-150. What would you rather own? It's a chalk and cheese decision.

The aluminium F-150 hasn't set the world on fire, so why should the aluminium SuperDuty?

Even the next Frontier will challenge the Colorado. It's apparently going to be even more refined than anything on the market.

As for my bias towards diesel, I at least state I'm diesel biased not like most of you brand apologists "Awlone".

@Anything but an EcoBust

- You were saying that an OHV engine is simpler than an Ecoboost.

Please explain how GM gets VVT out of a OHV single cam in block V8 design?

Please explain how GM or Chrysler's cylinder deactivation works.

Please explain the pro's and cons of overhead cam engines versus over head valve engines.

I'm betting that all I will see from you are a bunch of vague comments slagging Ford.

@LouBC,
As of late, at the behest of others' who comment at PUTC, I've increased my input regarding US full size pickups. Even then many don't like my comments. I don't apologise, but I do expect that others' should respect my views, even though they might not agree.

As always, I do extensive research prior to my comments and also I use my experience in mechanics and economics to make determinations regarding how I translate the information and data I use.

I do also believe I have made relatively accurate assessments within the US pickup market regarding trends, etc. Unlike many of those who comment here on PUTC I don't just consider a bigger number better. It seems many just use review and magazine data. Even then many times I've seen this data skewed incorrectly to support their brand biases.

As for my support for Ram. It isn't support, ask any of the Ram apologist. Just the other day I passed a subjective comment on the styling ques and suspension/payload of the Ram. It was quite negative.

As for the coil suspension of the Ram. I do think FCA has done extensive research on what the consumer expects from a pickup in the US market. It seems as I've stated 75% of all pickups sold in the US are SUV alternatives. The average Joe/Jane invests in one as a lifestyle choice. This is driven by the utility of this style of vehicle.

One article I read stated the average payload ever in a pickup is around 1 000lbs and the max towed is around 7 000lbs.

This fits in well with the Colorado's capabilities and most of what is sold in the US as a pickup. So I do believe the figure to be relatively accurate. This is why I make comments regarding the "tow wars" that continually hit this site as almost not relevant unless you need to move a certain amount of weight. Those figures also indicate to me there is a large market in the US for non-blown V6 and midsize pickups.

The Ram is more of a compromise from a "workhorse" perspective. But the formula seems to be working for FCA. The changes to the Ram suspension would be relatively simple, but they have yet to incorporate the changes in the suspension you speak of. Why? Because Ram are moving off the lots in ever increasing numbers.

There's an old adage, "if it ain't broke don't fix it". I do think that's the FCA slant regarding the Ram.

As for coil sprung rear suspensions, I'd bet my gonads the next Titan has a coil sprung assend. It will be based on the global Navara suspension. Read this link. The suspension is compared to a Maxima in comfort and can carry a 2 500lb payload with a 7 800lb tow rating. This suspension configuration would be easy to change to suit a larger vehicle.

A vehicle like what I mentioned for the next Titan will place not only Ford, but the GMs and Ram HDs under a bit of stress. I'm not saying they will sell in the same numbers, but they will stagnate or even reduce the number of "SUV" HDs sold by the Big 2 and FCA.

Nissan have had heavier coil sprung suspension in their larger Patrol pickups for a couple of decades now as well.

Again, in particular Ford will have it's hands full with the aluminium HDs to turn a profit, like it will have with the aluminium F-150.

Ford HDs are only going to aluminium to reduce Fords development and tooling costs. This is a smart move on Ford's part. But it will still cost lots of money.

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/2015-nissan-navara-ute-review-first-drive-29248#.VKwU8LvTnIU

@Big Al from Oz - I don't see many 3/4 ton pickups. There isn't much of a price difference between them so buyers tend to opt for the 1 ton.

As far as you accretions that the F150 is not a benchmark and not all journalists have picked it, you are basing that comment on the Car Trend test.
Benchmark vehicles set the standard. I had made a benchmark comment a long time ago about the Ram 1500 BUT we have not seen coil springs on other 1/2 tons nor have we seen air ride. We have seen grill shutters though. The Ram is a BOF car/SUV competitor.

I'm sure you will bring up the lame 1k cargo and 7k capacities cited in the Car Trend test. Ever stop to think that 1k gets cited because most people are completely clueless as to how much items weigh?
just for fun this summer I weighed all of the contents of my "dry box" which contains all of my Emergency gear. It weighed 351 lb and then another 150 lb for the box. Basically 500 lbs for jacks, tools, chains, cables, first aid and survival gear. The box wasn't even full.

The PUTC test clearly showed that the Ram even with the much more powerful 5.7 was clearly out of its league among pickups.

The F150 with the 5.0 was in the hunt with every test. We must be aware of the fact that the 5.0 Coyote engine is Ford's mid level engine.

I DO agree that the aluminum pickup has not lived up to the MPG hype but does any new vehicle live up to its hype?

One point that seems to be lost is the fact that the aluminum Ford is at the START of its development cycle.

@LouBC,
I'm not a Ram fan, but why is it Ram has improved markedly in numbers moved over the past several years or so?

What is Ram doing that is incorrect? Looking at what FCA has done with Ram is quite remarkable. Like I stated why make any changes? They are selling.

I do believe FCA will make changes to Ram once the increase in sales flat lines. Would you do any different if it were your business? Why invest money when it's not a necessity.

Ford had to make a large change. It's unfortunate that it didn't pan out the way Ford wanted. The aluminium F-150 is remarkable, but is this "remarkableness" of much value to the average Joe/Jane wanting to carry 1 000lbs in the bed and tow 7 000lbs on occasion?

Your comment regarding the Car Trend test can be supported by looking at the capabilities of largest pickup segement in the US. This is why I believe their information to be relatively accurate. People aren't buying 1/2 ton pickups to tow 10k and carry 2 000lbs in the bed.

75% are bought to go to Home Depot, pick up the kids, and go fishing or camping once a year and drive to work alone as a daily driver.

As for SUV SuperDuty pickups. I see quite a few, even in the NE. I do believe they are turning a larger profit than the 1/2 ton pickups.

Why else would Nissan and Toyota want to take a piece of the light SUV HD market?

The problem you have is data sets aren't aligning to your paradigms concerning your belief in Ford. My Ram comments are purely business case based.

Lou, why do you think Ram hasn't made the changes you think are necessary? It would be an easy change for FCA to make.

@LouBC,
This comment is an extension of my previous comment to you.

Your comment regarding the hype is not quite true. The Colorado exceeded expectations. If you've read many of the comments regarding the F-150 many anticipated it's FE to exceed that of the diesel Ram 1500. Even Ford made many comments regarding the new 2.7 and the weight advantage of aluminium and it's impact on FE.

Face it, Ford oversold this new truck by a long shot. Now to the point where it isn't using FE as it's major selling point, when the move to aluminium is primarily driven by FE.

I've also heard that the FE of the 2.7 EcoBoost driven under normal conditions by the average Joe/Jane isn't returning the figures they would have expected either. Maybe this is why Ford isn't using FE as a marketing tool.

The Colorado is a vehicle that exceeded expectations. Even reading Mark Williams comment regarding his drive of the vehicle gave that impression. Again, it's not that the Colorado is a better pickup than the best full size, it's the improvement in refinement and performance that caught him out.

As for the aluminium truck being the first. I do support this to a degree. But even then with the investment Ford had made this truck should have performed better. It isn't the aluminium body that is the F-150's drawback. It's the lack of refinement in the drivetrain, engine and suspension. If Ford can alter this then the truck will become much better.

How long will Ford use the leaf sprung assend in the aluminium F-150? With the new chassis manufacturing, can this chassis support a coil sprung assend? Will a new chassis be needed?

I do see the next generation of pickups using coil assends. As I stated 75% of pickups sold are SUVs, even here in Australia. People are going to expect more refinement.

The companies that can deliver this refinement will be the winners. That is why FCA improved Ram sales......refinement, not best class figures driven by reviewers and manufacturers.

@1elle-elle-aye,
This is in case my comment doesn't come up that I posted.

How many people in the US care about J2807? Very few.

So, you have a pickup that tows 8 000lbs. How many will ever use that capability. Especially when 75% are sold to Joe/Jane as a SUV?

They ask the salesperson if a pickup they are interested in can tow their boat or utility trailer. If the salesperson say "Yes" they buy the truck.

As for your costing per mile. People are more interested in the initial purchasing price of a vehicle than any other factor involved in the process of investing in a vehicle.

This actually came from a Ford review into what direction to take concerning engines in 2004. Ford had to decide whether to go the turbo gas engine or diesel. Ford stated diesel was ultimately the better option, but the consumer was driven by initial vehicle purchase.

Your comment is of value to fleet operators and some businesses.

So, you comment is of little relevance to the 75% of potential pickup customers. Some will look at what you put forward, but how many? Very few.

If what you stated was true then not many Ram 1500s would sell, considering their low payloads. But they have increased markedly in sales, haven't they?

@BigAlfromOz - most do NOT care about J2807 or are completely ignorant in relation to capacity.

THAT I DO AGREE.

Ram just like most car companies are AWARE of that FACT. Why do you thing our cargo ratings are less than what you always mention when comparing global pickups?

Just because most people are too stupid to understand the ratings for their vehicles does not mean everyone should build to a low rating and say "caveat emptor"?

The F150 in the PUTC test had a 1,880lb cargo rating and that wasn't even the max cargo rating. The Chevy was 1,580lb without max cargo. The GM had max cargo at 1,960.

I personally do care that most overload their 1/2 ton trucks because it is a safety issue. Ford and GM have shown that you can get decent empty performance without sacrificing capacity.

If Ram wants to sell record numbers of 1/2 ton crew cabs with poor capacity and the public is too stupid to notice........ good for FCA and too bad for the consumer.

I won't buy a truck unless it has at least 1,500 capacity. Ignorance does not stand as defense in a court of law and doesn't count as justification for a purchase decision. It does count as a marketing strategy.